"The Wii U is crap" "awful console" "Nintendo are walking dead"

[Professor Lupin Madblood]

Honestly, no. Not really. It isn't doing exceptionally WELL, then again everyone is comparing it to the original Wii and it will NEVER sell as well as the original Wii did. It will sell as well as any other normal console would. The beginnings of a new console generation always begin the same. Bunch of dumbasses spouting shit on the consoles they don't want people buying so they can get the games they are selling on the platforms they want people to buy.

Where did you get your numbers?

I ask because this Gamsutra article [http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/186741/At_57K_sold_Wii_Us_January_performance_is_historically_abysmal.php#.USGoBKVwpZg], a few months old, paints a pretty grim picture of the Wii U.

Additionally, a more recent article from Joystiq [http://www.joystiq.com/2013/05/14/pachter-wii-u-sales-hit-55-000-in-april-20-000-below-wii/] mentions how the Wii U has been outsold several times over by the PS3 and 360, in addition to not managing to outsell the Wii itself.\

Keeping in mind, these are not the PS4 and the Next Xbox. These are consoles that have been around since two thousand and five. The Wii U isn't managing to keep its head above water with peers it should be beyond, and Nintendo's lack of support for it (the damn thing still doesn't have any games) is not helping matters.

Personally, I think it's completely fair to compare the Wii U to the Wii. Nintendo wanted to make a new console that, by virtue of its hardware, is not compatible with its predecessor. They can't be considered equals simply because of how they are constructed, and the fact that Nintendo aren't making Wii games any more. The Wii U is Nintendo's big push into the "next" console generation, and it strikes me as rather silly to say that an underwhelming performance is due to the fact that the last one was so popular.

Yes, the last one was popular. If it was so popular, Nintendo should have stuck with it.

 

[PoolCleaningRobot]

I wonder what EA(and their employees) are going to say down the road when not putting games on the Wii-U turns to be more of a financial risk. I guess they will butter up when they get there. All Nintendo is missing is relevancy and I believe that will kick in when Nintendo either gets around to releasing their own games or everyone finds out how much it costs to actually make use of PS4/X-box(That is if it matches,) hardware.

That might actually go in the opposite direction you're describing. If the rumors about new game engines like the Unreal Engine 4 are true, the new hardware will make it easier and faster to develop games. Trying to cram as much content into "weaker" hardware as possible could cost more money, which is one of the bigger costs in game development now. These new engines are also supposed to be easier to scale though so who knows.

On topic, dude seems a little harsh on the Wii U. I feel like Nintendo has been a bit of let down this past generation but they're hardly dying. They earn infinity monies from pokemon as it is

 

[Amir Kondori]

At the end of a week in which Electronic Arts confirmed it wasn't developing a thing for the Wii U, one of the software engineers in EA Sports' Canada studio, in a series of since-deleted tweets, disparaged the console as "crap" and suggested Nintendo should give up on hardware altogether.

"The Wii U is crap. Less powerful than an Xbox 360. Poor online/store. Weird tablet," tweeted Bob Summerwill, listed as a senior software engineer at EA Canada, in a reply to a tweet posting a link about EA's no-Wii U news. "Nintendo are walking dead at this point."

Though the tweets, made early yesterday morning, have since been deleted, screenshots of them mushroomed across multiple sites, most prominently on NeoGAF.

Summerwill didn't let up after that first tweet. "Nintendo are still operating like it's 1990," he goes on, saying it should have gotten out of the hardware business and made its Mario and Legend of Zelda franchises exclusives on either the PlayStation 4 or next Xbox.

"Instead, they make this awful console," he added. Then, of EA's withdrawal from developing for Wii U, he said, "It is an utterly intentional decision to focus our resources on markets which actually matter."

http://kotaku.com/ea-sports-developer-calls-wii-u-crap-and-nintendo-wa-508481261

Hard to say I disagree. However, dead they are not. Even if in the end the U is a massive failure, they have enough money it doesn't matter. I wish they'd just make software for other consoles or PC though.

Harvest Moon on PC? Yes please.

No one has "enough money that it doesn't matter". Nintendo has offices around the world, thousands of staff, large infrastructure, and all of that costs money. Its called "operating expenses". Also, Nintendo is a publicly traded company and its leaders have a fiduciary duty to make money for its investors. If the WiiU is a failure Nintendo will either have to restructure, laying off employees, cancel games in production, and possibly sell property just like THQ towards the end, or completely kill its console division and become a software company like SEGA did. They certainly don't have "enough money that it doesn't matter".
Luckily their mobile business is very good, but of course that is under threat from smart phones and tablets. If the WiiU fails they could find themselves embattled from all sides. If the WiiU fails they will likely end up as a publisher only.

 

[InvaderTim]

I personally think my Wii U is quite good, do I get an article on my opinion?

 

[BM19]

I have to say, Nintendo is not in a great position with the Wii U -- but this is not the proper way to voice it, especially if you're connected to a corporation like EA. It's unprofessional and juvenile, a comment more suited to a Youtube comment section than the highly-visible profile of a representative of such a large corporation.

Saying that Nintendo is "dead" or should have gone the way of SEGA is short-sighted and foolish. While the Wii U is in the middle of some pretty piss-poor sales after a decent launch, you have to remember that A) Nintendo has not released many quality games for the system yet, B) any console release was going to be disappointing in terms of sales after the money-printing behemoth that was the Wii, and C) Nintendo has barely marketed the thing.

Does any of this sound familiar? It should, because its the same thing that happened with the 3DS. And now the thing is selling like gangbusters. (Bonus points for the system also being underpowered compared to its competition -- the Vita isn't doing too well, sadly, even if its hardware runs circles around the 3DS)

My assumption is that Nintendo put out the Wii U early for the hardcore, early-adopters crowd to get some feedback and polish some gems -- work on the UI, tighten up their new online network, etc. Then, when the PS4 and Nextbox DO come out, Nintendo will have a small but established base to work with, some big guns to put out (Smash Bros, 3D Mario, Zelda HD, Pikmin 3, etc.) and some material to actually promote while their competition is still gaining their footing. Nintendo is sitting on a massive war-chest of funds, so advertising won't be a problem; they just need something to advertise!

And while the Wii U is doing poorly, we still have no clue how its competition will do. The 360 is still selling well, while the PS3 is putting up some strong numbers, and sadly it doesn't look like either system will be backwards compatible with their successors. Why would you rush to get a PS4 when it has three worthwhile games while the PS3 has a generation of quality titles? At least with the Wii U, the transition was a LITTLE less painful (though switching shop titles to the Wii U was a chore -- adorable Pikmin animations and all).
Hell, I'm still playing through The Last Story and Xenoblade Chronicles while I'm waiting for the Wii U to put out a killer app. The competition won't have that same advantage.

So I certainly wouldn't count the Wii U out, and I DEFINITELY wouldn't count Nintendo out. Third parties have always had trouble utilizing (or perhaps caring about) Nintendo's hardware, especially compared to the Big N themselves. (Remember how Mario Galaxy looked damn-near HD while most of the other games were pixelated messes? Case and point) They'll either get that third party support or they won't. But what Nintendo will always have is their core franchises, and honestly there is a pretty sizable market for people who just want to play the next Zelda or Smash Bros -- myself included.

Only time will tell. But I can say this much -- Nintendo isn't going anywhere.
And let's face it: whether you like them or not, a video game industry without Nintendo is certainly a lesser one.

 

[WouldYouKindly]

EA really needs to shut the fuck up this point.Atleast Nintendo does'nt have two Golden Poo awards to their name.

EA shouldn't either. It's just that gamers seem to vote often in that crap. Haliburton or Monsanto should have won those shit company awards because they're actually doing bad things in the world rather than just pissing off a loud consumer base by admittedly being dicks.

Alright, sorry about that.

The WiiU controller doesn't need to exist... That stupid tablet thing just flat out shouldn't be there. All they needed to do was offer a console with the same kid friendly nature of the Wii with actual 1-to-1 motion controls and enough power to actually play some graphically intensive games(this alone would allow some devs to actually make games for it). Instead they added a monster controller that serves very little purpose and is a pain in the balls to design for in a way that doesn't feel like it's massively contrived. There is just no way to program a game that makes it feel natural to take your eyes off the screen. I'm sure there are a couple of devs who could do it in a non-frustrating and not contrived way, but nowhere near enough.

That being said, Nintendo will never die. They are the necromancers of the videogame world, selling games and concepts so old and overdone they should probably be dead, but they just keep living. Nintendo isn't undead, undead is their business strategy... Kind of like Umbrella.

 

[Atmos Duality]

To me, it looks like one lame dog growling at another lame dog.

Only, one of those dogs is a faithful friend, sadly losing it in its old age, while the other has been a mean frothing mad hellhound that someone should have had put down ages ago.

 

[Overusedname]

Every now and then I get confused as to what constitutes 'news'.

I mean, nothing against Kotaku, but...why does this guy's opinion matter? I mean, the guy said it was less powerful than a 360. A google search proves him wrong. Very wrong.

 

[GeneralFungi]

People don't buy Nintendo consoles for gritty shooters and year-old ports, so stop trying to sell them there. Make a game that can find a niche or demographic on a Nintendo platform, and you can make huge amounts of money. Just look at Level 5 (Professor Layton), Capcom (Monster Hunter) and Ubisoft (Just Dance).

I suppose that's the reason why titles like Star Fox 64 and Ocarina of Time weren't ported to the 3DS... Oh wait, yes they were.

Need I also remind you that two of the most highly anticipated Wii U games for 2013 are Aliens Colonial Marines (old port) and Wind Waker HD (really, really old port... er, excuse me... "remastering").

Yeah, Nintendo totally isn't a home for ports of old software... like Deus Ex: Human Revolution...

They come to the consoles but they are by no means system sellers. Their inclusion is a plus but I don't see many people rushing out to pick up a 3DS so they can play Star Fox on it.

And due to negative press Aliens Colonial Marines isn't being released on the Wii U. It was canceled. And really... it was highly anticipated until the day it was actually released. The point he was trying to make was that the older ports being put out aren't enough to convince people to buy the console. Which is clearly demonstrated by the lack of sales as of recent. People want games like Pikmin 3, Wonderful 101, Game and Wario, next Mario next Zelda etc. When they start being released it is highly likely that people will begin to adopt the system more rapidly.

 

[Lightknight]

Wii U less powerful than a 360? I bet next we're going to have a story about one of EA's Janitors who believes that the Wii U kills puppies.

I mean, I certainly don't see it competing graphically with Sony and Microsoft's next hitters, but it is certainly more powerful than the 360. I don't know exactly how much better it is but it's at least clearly better.

I still think the Wii U is bad for a number of reasons and will continue to defend that belief, but that guy made ignorant mistakes here.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

I do have to agree on the hardware front, they'd probably be a lot better off just producing games. They really havn't got a marketable gimmick like they did last time, there wasn't any household entertainment where even 'you're grandma can play and it gets you moving around, fitness hoooo', but now days everybody and their grandma already has a tablet.

Can't really see the next Xbox or PS3 doing much better to be honest in this economy though. I expect the Xbox to sell well because all the dude-bros will have to find a way to play all the fresh murder sims with their dude-bro mates.

Dude-bro is now a legit scientific term to refer a sub section of society.

 

[Starik20X6]

Wait, EA isn't going to be developing for the Wii U? I think this news calls for... A Mario Party!

 

[ThePuzzldPirate]

I wonder what EA(and their employees) are going to say down the road when not putting games on the Wii-U turns to be more of a financial risk. I guess they will butter up when they get there. All Nintendo is missing is relevancy and I believe that will kick in when Nintendo either gets around to releasing their own games or everyone finds out how much it costs to actually make use of PS4/X-box(That is if it matches,) hardware.

That might actually go in the opposite direction you're describing. If the rumors about new game engines like the Unreal Engine 4 are true, the new hardware will make it easier and faster to develop games. Trying to cram as much content into "weaker" hardware as possible could cost more money, which is one of the bigger costs in game development now. These new engines are also supposed to be easier to scale though so who knows.

On topic, dude seems a little harsh on the Wii U. I feel like Nintendo has been a bit of let down this past generation but they're hardly dying. They earn infinity monies from pokemon as it is

That is true possibility as well, so much is in the air at the moment. I'm covered with the other 2 consoles being so close to PC, I won't be missing games. The rest though is speculation from me, this gen is going to be nothing like the previous, it's why it is interesting.

 

[DrunkOnEstus]

This is getting ridiculous.

The Wii U is not less powerful than the 360, frostbite 3 is just unscalable and EA is basically openly admitting that their flagship engine is kinda shit by forcing this issue. Cryengine 3 and UE4 run on Wii U, and the Wii U has 4 times as much RAM. If a 460 can run their engine, the Wii U sure as hell can.

I would bet this is either EA being butthurt about Nintendo not allowing Origin on their system, or refusing to meet certain demands Nintendo has for third parties. By making it about Frostbite, it just makes Frostbite look like a poorly coded engine.

Also, even if it isn't your thing, Nintendo has not been boring. They're the only company that exclusively exists to make games and game machines, and making attempts to change the way we play games other than "brick with buttons connected to box". How different are the 360 and the PS3 really, other than the PS3's inability to play Halo or Gears of War? Yes, Nintendo also releases "the same game" through the generations, but we all know they aren't the same game, it's a fundamentally new experience that uses a familiar name and mascot in order to guarantee sales from a core fanbase, that frequently reaches the top of critical acclaim every time.

Sorry about that, this Nintendo bashing just gets to me sometimes. Our hobby would take a crushing loss if they were to truly fail, and we would lose the only company that sees the potential for this medium beyond profit returns.

 

[The White Hunter]

Duty calls Jeffers. Into the breach once more!

...

Y'know, despite not having or particularly wanting anything to do with the WiiU, I'm not convinced that it's doing as badly as some people seem to think. Obviously it's not exploding like the Wii did, but that was something of an exception. Is it doing any worse than the 360 or PS3 did at the same stage?

It's doing okay, it's jut fallen well below the targets set by Nintendo, they expected to catch lightning twice and didn't and it's hurt them. It's a decent console and it has some good games (not many at this point, but some, I only own 3 and only want another 1 at the moment), the store is a big improvement over previous iterations and the online is better too.

That said it desperately needs more games to come for it, but thats a patience issue, there's a lot coming in Q3 and Q4 of this year

Also, it is more powerful than the 360 and PS3. IT's not as powerful as the PS4 and likely not as powerful as the NextBox, but it's not an 8 year old piece of hardware. Case in point: It can actually do things out of god damn sequence.

 

[Casual Shinji]

Being a software engineer, this guy probably just has a chubby for the next big thing (hardware). People that specialize in one area of expertize will often get tunnelvision.

The most I would declare Nintendo as is a weird rich hermit. Kinda like a Howard Huges if he was a gaming company.

 

[The White Hunter]

This is getting ridiculous.

The Wii U is not less powerful than the 360, frostbite 3 is just unscalable and EA is basically openly admitting that their flagship engine is kinda shit by forcing this issue. Cryengine 3 and UE4 run on Wii U, and the Wii U has 4 times as much RAM. If a 460 can run their engine, the Wii U sure as hell can.

I would bet this is either EA being butthurt about Nintendo not allowing Origin on their system, or refusing to meet certain demands Nintendo has for third parties. By making it about Frostbite, it just makes Frostbite look like a poorly coded engine.

I'm really starting to think there's some truth to those rumours, it seems like every other day now somebody from EA drops their trousers to take a shit on the Wii U. I'm sorry but there's got to be more to it than this, why else would they waste their time on childish slander?

I remember reading a thing from Crytek saying they had CRysis 3 running but they can't release it on their own. Do EA have some of the rights to it? Cuz if I were Nintendo I'd sweep in on that and just be like hey we have some money for that.

As for Frostbite, I'm not even sure they tried. Frostbite is heavily GPU dependant, even on the PC it benchmarks well on most CPU's if the GPU is strong, and if you can run it on the PS3 and Xbox 360 it will run on the Wii U's GPU. Unless their new iteration of it is suddenly hugely bound to the CPU that is, but I doubt it.

Frostbite is buggy as hell though, just thought I'd bring that up. Early Battlefield 3 was a plethora of noclip bugs and exploits because the engine is pretty with it's fancy flashlights but ultimately held together with tissue paper and rubber bands.

Yes, Nintendo also releases "the same game" through the generations, but we all know they aren't the same game, it's a fundamentally new experience that uses a familiar name and mascot in order to guarantee sales from a core fanbase, that frequently reaches the top of critical acclaim every time.

Miyamoto once said that he thinks of his characters as a troupe of actors, ready to fit any kind of game and play the roles needed. Having those things ready lets him be more creative with gameplay and stage design I guess. Mario Galaxy 2 for example has the exact same story as the first one, just hacked down, but it also has a lot more levels and a lot more creative and polished levels at that, it's a lot more fun to play and is easily the best 3D platformer I have ever played.